Tag: minivan news

“The JSC cannot form a court”: JSC Vice Chair Abdulla Didi grilled by Parliamentary Oversight Committee

The Vice Chair of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC), Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Didi, attended parliament’s Independent Committees Oversight Committee to answer its queries about the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court and the appointment of the panel of judges hearing the Nasheed trial.

Former President Mohamed Nasheed is being tried for his detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

Abdulla Didi attended the committee despite the chair of the judicial watchdog, Adam Mohamed, disputing that the JSC was answerable to parliament on the grounds that the summons referred to an “ongoing case”.

Asked if he believed Adam Mohamed had acted legally in unilaterally deciding that the JSC would not abide by the oversight committee’s summons, Abdulla Didi responded that he “will not say that the Chair acted against the law,” and that he “cannot make any comments on the matter.”

“I personally believe that we must be answerable to the oversight committee. That is why I am here today,” he said.

Conflict of Interest

Before discussions on the scheduled topic began, Abdulla Didi requested that Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ali Waheed leave the committee.

Didi said Ali Waheed currently had a case against him in the Criminal Court of which he the judge, and hence he believed there is a conflict of interest to have the MP question him during Thursday’s meeting.

“I wouldn’t have felt any hesitation if all the JSC members were here. But since I am being questioned separately, I don’t think it is a good idea to have someone who has a criminal case against him question me here,” Abdulla Didi said.

Ali Waheed said he believed he was not required to leave the committee as per the constitution, but was willing to do so as it was “ethically the right thing to do.”

Chair of the committee MDP MP Ahmed Sameer informed Abdulla Didi that Ali Waheed had previously informed the committee that he would not be asking any questions from the JSC member, and that he was only participating in the meeting due to the quorum requirements needed to have the meeting.

“Abdulla Didi is here as a JSC member, and not as a Criminal Court Judge. Likewise, it is the citizen Ali Waheed who has a pending case in the court, not the MP for Thohdoo constituency. As there is no conflict when viewed in the light of the capacities in which you both are participating in this meeting, I am of the opinion that MP Ali Waheed is legally allowed to stay and question you. I would like to state here that if Ali Waheed is leaving, it is only out of his personal accord,” Sameer stated.

Later in the meeting, Sameer referred to Ali Waheed’s voluntary exit from the meeting as an example of abstaining from action in cases of conflict of interest, and asked Abdulla Didi why he had not similarly abstained from voting on deciding the panel overseeing Nasheed’s case.

“You are a member of the JSC which voted on choosing judges for the Hulhumale’ Court panel of magistrates. You also serve as a judge in the Criminal Court. The case which this panel is to preside over concerns the Chief Judge of the court you serve under, Judge Abdulla Mohamed. Under these circumstances, why didn’t you abstain from the vote which decided upon magistrates for the Abdulla Mohamed case?” Sameer asked.

“I had no such intentions like what you are implying. The short answer to that question is that we did not decide on the panel to preside on an ‘Abdulla Mohamed case’. It disturbs me when you refer to the case as such,” Didi responded.

“It is a case regarding the arrest of Abdulla Mohamed, in which some other people are accused of having committed criminal acts. The case is about them, not Abdulla Mohamed,” he said, shaking his head.

Sameer also asked about alleged conflict of interest in the vote taken by the JSC to continue running the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court itself.

“JSC Member Ahmed Rasheed, who is the husband of a Hulhumale’ Court Magistrate, was among the members who voted to establish or continue the said court, isn’t he? And you voted, too. This is extremely concerning, and so I repeat: the case concerns the detention of the Chief Judge of the Criminal Court by the then government. You are a judge serving in that court. Rasheed’s wife is a magistrate in the court trying this case. Do you think this decision is impartial under these circumstances?” Sameer asked.

Didi attempted to dodge the question, stating he was unaware how Rasheed had cast his vote. MP Sameer, however stated he had seen the related documents, and informed him that four members had voted, including Rasheed and Abdulla Didi.

Didi still insisted that he “found it difficult” to answer the question, or decide on the validity of the decision.

The Vice Chair of the judicial watchdog stated that as a norm, if a member felt that he had a conflict of interest in any matter that the commission was taking a vote on, he would state the reasons and excuse himself. He further stated that if a member failed to excuse himself, and yet JSC Chair Adam Mohamed believed such a conflict existed, the chair would then point it out and discuss with the relevant member an agreeable way to proceed.

MDP MP Hamid Abdul Ghafoor asked if any such issues had arisen during the vote taken to appoint magistrates to the Hulhumale’ Court panel.

“I cannot recall if any members declared any conflict of interest. Nor can I at all remember whether the Chair noticed such a conflict,” Abdulla Didi said.

The panel

Didi said that discussion about the panel of judges of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court initially began in the JSC after the then head of the court requested the commission assign judges from other courts to preside in a pending case at the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

“Once this request came in, we discussed the matter and proposed names for the bench. We then sent these names to the Supreme Court bench, otherwise known as the Judicial Council, for comment. They decided on those names and sent it back to the JSC. This is how the process went,” Didi told the committee.

“This is also completely in line with what the laws state, I refer to Articles 47 to 49 of the Judges’ Act. I might be referring to the previous Judges’ Act. There were some amendments made to it later, which may have changed the order of these articles I quote. I am not sure, I haven’t reviewed it that much,” Abdulla Didi said.

Article 47 of the Judges’ Act states “If a judge is temporarily transferred to preside over a case in a different court, he must be transferred to a court of the same level as the one he is serving in.”

Article 48 states “A judge can be temporarily appointed to another court in the instance that the court is unable to sufficiently complete assigned work, or if the court had difficulties providing services, or if the judges serving in the court has been suspended from their duties, or if other circumstances which may cause a delay in the completion of work assigned to the court occur.”

Article 49 states “It is the Judicial Services Commission, with the counsel of the Judicial Council, which will come to a decision on the transfer of judges to oversee cases in other courts.”

After listening to Abdulla Didi’s version of events, Sameer presented the information previously gathered by the commission.

“The laws state that the JSC has no right to decided on the judges on a panel. Only the head magistrate of the relevant court has the powers to do so,” Sameer said.

“Now, the Chief Magistrate at this court at the time, Huraa Magistrate Moosa Naseem, sent in three names for the panel to JSC asking only for your commission’s comments. The list included his name as well. Can you then tell me what legal right the JSC has to disregard these three names and appoint three completely different magistrates?”

Abdulla Didi said in response: “We at the JSC considered the important cases pending at the Hulhumale’ Court. So we proposed other names with the intention of assigning qualified, experienced judges. I don’t believe this conflicts with any existing laws. What I am saying is, I did not come to any decision. It was after discussion with the other JSC members that we passed it through a vote.”

MDP MP Ahmed Abdulla asked the JSC member why, if the selection was based on merit and experience, the three magistrates proposed by the Hulhumale’ Court had been disregarded while all three were currently serving as chief magistrates of their respective courts.

“Let me explain. According to the Judge’s Act, no judge had the power to bring in judges from other courts to preside on cases. JSC considers the good magistrates in the atoll… That is not to imply that any magistrate is bad at their work, just that because of the nature of this case, we took special care to appoint the most able and appropriate judges who will treat the case with extra care and contemplate the matter deeply,” Abdulla said.

Didi insisted that the JSC that held legal powers to appoint magistrates to the panel, at which point the Chair of the parliamentary committee intervened and advised the judge to refrain from making misleading and non-factual statements.

“I am deeply disturbed that you are making these comments and passing it off ‘as what the law says’. The law says perfectly clearly outlines the role of the chief magistrate, and that if other magistrates are temporarily being brought into a court, they must be from the same judicial jurisdiction,” Sameer intervened.

Didi also claimed the JSC had appointed the panel after the Hulhumale’ Court requested additional magistrates to assist with their work.

However, member appointed from among the public to JSC Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman, who had been interviewed by the committee prior to Abdulla Didi on Thursday, had stated that the request for additional magistrates and other support for the court had come after the appointment of the panel of magistrates.

MP Ghafoor questioned if the bench had been appointed after Nasheed’s case had been referred to the Hulhumale’ Court, to which Didi replied in the affirmative.

Asked if Didi was aware that one of the magistrates appointed to the bench had allegations of disciplinary issues, sexual offences and corruption against him, he responded that he was not aware of such a case.

When MDP MP Rugiyya Mohamed said JSC Member Sheikh Rahman had confirmed that indeed such an allegation was being looked into by the commission, Abdulla Didi then responded that he had heard such rumours via media and had asked administrative staff to look into the matter.

He later said he “did not believe any of the magistrates on the bench would have done anything of the sort.”

“I cannot confirm whether such a matter exists. The thing is, if we are to consider an allegation or a complaint, there has to be some solid reasons that should support the allegation, whether it be proved or not. If it is a solid and believable allegation, then I might not agree to have him on the bench,” he continued.

“I don’t think just being alleged of anything is reason enough to remove any magistrate from the bench. The allegation itself must carry some weight. However, such allegations can only be cleared once the relevant authority investigates it. So, I do believe any such investigations must be expedited. I don’t see any reason why such a magistrate cannot sit on the panel in the meantime.”

Is the Hulhumale court legitimate?

Asked directly whether Abdulla Didi believed the court to be a legitimate entity, he answered, “I am not saying it is a legitimate court. Then again, nor I am I saying it is illegitimate. All I can say is I don’t believe it will be liquidated.”

“I think the JSC cannot establish a court through a vote. I can’t really recall the law too well at this moment, but the JSC certainly cannot form a court,” Abdulla Didi confirmed in response to a question posed by Sameer.

Sameer then asked if the Vice Chair of JSC had cast his vote on the matter of forming the Hulhumale’ Court.

“That’s a huge misunderstanding. We never voted to form a court. We voted to establish that, in accordance with the laws, the Hulhumale’ Court will not be automatically cancelled. The court was in existence even before [the vote],” Abdulla Didi answered.

However, Sameer challenged Abdulla Didi’s statement. He stated that in 2007, the President’s Office had created an administrative office called the Hulhumale’ Courts Section, and not a court, saying that the existence of a magistrate court in Hulhumale’ is not noted on any paperwork.

“We have documents proving that after the ratification of the Judicature Act, that under a decision of the JSC itself, the budget, stamp and even staff of this Hulhumale’ Court Section office were transferred to the Family Court in Male’. And then, out of the blue, your commission decided there is a Magistrate Court in Hulhumale’,” Sameer stated.

“You are aware that a case against the Hulhumale’ Court was filed in a lower court. The JSC then referred it to the Supreme Court. Then JSC Chair Adam Mohamed, who is a Supreme Court Judge, cast the deciding vote on the case. Do you believe this was conducted in due process?” Sameer asked.

Abdulla Didi refused to answer the question on the grounds that he could comment on a decision of the Supreme Court. He said “there is no way I can call that a bad ruling.”

Likes(3)Dislikes(0)

President appoints new Maldives high commissioner to India

Mohamed Naseer has been appointed as the High Commissioner of Maldives to India.

President Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik presented a letter of appointment to Naseer on Sunday (March  10).

Speaking at the presentation, Waheed said he was confident that Naseer would protect and promote the interests of the people Maldives, and work to increase ties between Maldives and India.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

DRP rejects possibility of PPM coalition and “hereditary rule”

The Dhivehi Rayyithunge Party (DRP) has said it will never form a coalition with the Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), DRP Leader MP Ahmed Thasmeen Ali told local media.

“PPM left because they couldn’t continue with us. So there are no grounds to form a coalition now is there?” another local media outlet reported Thasmeen as staying.

“Hereditary rule, we cannot support that. So we cannot form a coalition with PPM,” Thasmeen said.

Furthermore, the coalition DRP forms will be subject to who they field as a presidential candidate, Thasmeen explained.

Gayoom formed PPM in 2011 after resigning from the DRP, following a dispute with Thasmeen and the party’s ejection of Umar Naseer.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

President Waheed claims 10,000 members for GIP by March 10

President Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik has claimed that his Gaumee Ithihaad Party (GIP) will reach 10,000 members by Sunday (March 10).

Speaking to local media, the president claimed that 9,000 members had signed for the party and that extensive campaigning was being carried out in Male’ to increase GIP’s membership.

Despite the president’s claims, the Elections Commission political registry presently shows that his party has only 4,012 registered members, local media reported.

President Waheed told local media that the push to reach 10,000 members was due to the recently passed political party bill, which states that any party with less than 10,000 members could face dissolution.

“I still don’t believe that this is something they [Parliament] should have done. I believe forming clubs, organisations and political parties is a right enshrined in the constitution. That is a fundamental right,” Waheed was told local newspaper Haveeru.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Liberian player signed to Maldivian football club “trapped” in Male’ after salary dispute

A Liberian striker brought in to play for a Maldivian football club has spoken of his desperation as he remains trapped in the Maldives with no money and no ticket home.

Wright Charles Gaye, a former striker for Maldivian football club Club Valencia, has spent the last six months living in poverty after the club failed to provide him with two month’s owed salary and a promised one-way ticket home.

Speaking to Minivan News on Thursday (March 7), the 27-year-old Liberian national revealed how he had been forced to live in accommodation with no water or electricity, having to survive on handouts from club officials and other players.

“It has been terrible. I am owed US$2,600 and a one-way-ticket home to Liberia, but for six months I have received nothing.

“It’s hard because I have family back in Africa. They are looking to me because I have to send money back. My son is no longer is school because I don’t have the money to send home,” Charles said.

The issue has now attracted the attention of Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), after Charles lodged a formal complaint to the international organisation.

A letter from FIFA calls for the Football Association of Maldives (FAM) to provide Club Valencia’s position on the claim lodged by Charles no later than March 25.

FAM was not responding to calls from Minivan News at time of press.

Charles, who has played for multiple clubs in Maldives, Sri Lanka and Liberia, claimed that Valencia’s Chairman Ibrahim Raai Rasheed had told him not to put anything in the news regarding his situation.

“He [Rasheed] is going around telling people that everything is okay for me. But if you want to believe that you can come and see my apartment.

“A former official from the club is giving me MVR 500 (US$32) a week because he feels sorry for me. It’s hard to survive on, but I feel ashamed to be calling for help,” he added.

The Liberian striker said that he had been recently moved into a guest house by his former club after he complained about the lack of electricity and water at his apartment.

Charles claimed that Rasheed had made multiple “promises” to the striker, assuring him that he would be given his wages and a flight home, but each time the chairman did not deliver.

“Sometimes the chairman would call me and say ‘Charles pack your things, you are leaving tomorrow, get your money together and get ready’, so when I pack and call him back, he doesn’t pick up. This has happened two or three times,” Charles said.

“In December I was told I would be leaving on December 23 and would arrive on December 25 on Christmas morning. It meant I would see my son and would get to spend Christmas with him. But over the next few days he was not taking my calls. When he did eventually pick up, he would just say ‘I’m busy, I’ll call you back,” he added.

Club Valencia responds

Responding to the footballer’s claims, Club Valencia Management – when contacted by Minivan News – said that Charles will be paid his full wages and will be given a ticket home to Liberia in Africa.

“There has been a lot of miscommunication recently. Charles has communicated with me on only a few things, but I feel bad for him,” a club official claimed. “His salary and ticket home is now all sorted had he will be returning home.”

The club’s management denied that Charles’ apartment was without running water and electricity, adding that they had written proof of utility bills for the months he had stayed there.

The reason behind the delay in Charles’ payments – according to Club Valencia Management – was that there had been delays in financial assistance from the sports ministry and from the club’s sponsorship.

Despite Valencia’s claims of financial hardship, the Liberian striker claimed that the club had recently brought in three foreign new players and a new coach for the team.

“[Valencia] must have the money. If they don’t, how can they bring in these new players, put them in a big hotel and let them eat in good restaurants? How can they do all that and not pay me?” Charles said.

Club Valencia Management confirmed that three new players and a coach had been taken on by the club.

Life as a foreign footballer in the Maldives

Wright Charles Gaye came to the Maldives four years ago after being signed by New Radiant SC, where he experienced similar pay disputes with the club before transferring to VB Addu FC – known as VB Sport Club until January 2012.

Following a complaint to the Football Association of Maldives over a lack of pay for six months, Charles was eventually paid by New Radiant SC in November 2012.

The striker joined Valencia in the June 2012 transfer period, and started playing in July until the clubs last game on September 28.

Having allegedly only received one month’s pay for July, Charles then left the club and has been waiting for a promised ‘one-way-ticket’ home and his remaining two month salary.

“When you first come to the Maldives as a player, they talk to you nicely and treat you well, but as soon as you sign the papers, it all finishes.

“Some Maldivian players have the same issue, I know two or three players from different clubs who have had payment problems, but for the foreign players it is worse,” Charles said.

The Liberian national also revealed how certain clubs retain foreign player’s passports over concern that the players will buy their own tickets and fly home.

“I have a friend who played here from Cameroon and the club hid his passport, and would not return it when he asked for it back.

“Whenever you ask for your passport they would give you a story, maybe say that is being kept in immigration. They have asked for mine before, but I know what would happen if I gave it them,” Charles alleged.

Addendum: Wright Charles Gaye subsequently contacted Minivan News to say Valencia had paid the US$2,600, an additional one month’s salary and had booked him a one-way flight to Liberia.

Photograph: Maldivesoccer.com

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

“Religious obligation” to bar Nasheed from upcoming election: Home Minister Dr Jameel

Additional Reporting by Mohamed Naahii

Home Minister Dr Mohamed Jameel Ahmed has claimed it is a religious obligation to bar former President Mohamed Nasheed from contesting the upcoming presidential elections, scheduled to take place on September 7.

Speaking at a rally held by Progressive Party of Maldives’ (PPM) presidential primary candidate Abdulla Yameen on Saturday (March 9), Jameel accused Nasheed of being a “coward” who ran away after resigning from power, adding that he no longer had the courage to lead the country.

Highlighting Nasheed’s recent stay in the Indian High Commission, Jameel stated that “it was a shame that Nasheed fled when he was supposed to face justice,” before claiming that he would not give the opportunity for someone like Nasheed to come to power.

“Nasheed of Canaryge does not have any chance to come to power. We would not give that chance [to him]. That is something we ought to do. It is both a national and a religious Farḍ (obligation),” he said.

According to local media, the Home Minister stated that “if we complete that task,” God would grant success to those leaders in the upcoming presidential election.

Jameel claimed the country had fallen into a “deep mess” in almost all areas, adding that the country is desperate for a determined leader who can revive the economy.

He contended that Nasheed did not have the qualities the country was expecting from its future leader.

“Unlike Nasheed, President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom whom Nasheed is saying that he would beat easily, had the courage to appear before police for questioning when he was called in,” Jameel said.

He argued that anyone other than Nasheed possesses courage to face law and justice.

Jameel – a former Justice Minister under President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom’s 30 year autocracy – has previously expressed urgency in concluding Nasheed’s trial before the upcoming elections.

In January, Jameel told local media that it was “crucial to conclude the case against Nasheed before the approaching presidential elections, in the interests of the nation and to maintain peace in it.”

“Every single day that goes by without the case being concluded contributes to creating doubt in the Maldivian people’s minds about the judiciary,” the home minister said at the time.

In January 2012, Jameel – who served as vice president of Dhivehi Quamee Party (DQP) – was questioned by police after Nasheed’s government accused DQP of attempting to incite religious hatred.

A pamphlet released by the DQP called on the public to “rise up and defend Islam”, whilst accusing Nasheed’s government of “operating under the influence of Jews and Christian priests”.

Home Minister Mohamed Jameel Ahmed was not responding to calls from Minivan News at time of press.

Maldives must curb external interference in its internal affairs

Also speaking at the rally on Saturday (March 9), half-brother to former President Gayoom, Abdulla Yameen, claimed that there was no need to allow “outside influence” in the internal affairs of the country.

The PPM presidential primary candidate said that should he be elected, he would protect the independence and sovereignty of the Maldives against the most powerful of nations.

Yameen’s comments come after Nasheed sought refuge in the Indian High Commission in Male’ last month.

For 11 days the former President stayed inside the high commission building, subsequently avoiding a trial hearing at Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

The international community has since called for free, fair and inclusive presidential elections in the Maldives.

Earlier this month Nasheed, who exited the Indian High Commission on February 23, was detained by police and produced at Hulhumale’ court, despite an alleged “understanding” between India and Maldives that he would be able to compete in the upcoming elections.

Nasheed is facing criminal charges over the controversial detention of Chief Judge of Criminal Court Abdulla Mohamed during the last days of his presidency.

Speaking at the campaign rally, Yameen criticised the Prosecutor General’s (PG) statement made on March 7, which stated that the PG did not object to delaying the trial until presidential elections scheduled for later this year are over.

“The PG is not entirely an independent individual. The PG becomes independent when he executes his responsibilities in accordance with these procedures. The PG cannot say that he has no reservations in delaying Nasheed’s trial for four weeks.

“The PG cannot say for instance that it is alright to put off the trial after the elections. This is something that the PG cannot say,” Yameen was quoted as saying in local media.

Yameen stated that an impartial trial against Nasheed must be held for his actions, and that any other presidential candidate should be held liable for their actions at any given time.

“Why can’t the foreign ambassadors accept the fact that anyone [competing for the Presidential elections] who violates the law must be disqualified.

“We also might fail to meet the criteria. In such a society it is possible for us to violate an individual’s right. If so even I must spend the day in court. How can Nasheed be an exception,” local newspaper Haveeru quoted Yameen as saying.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

US citizen arrested for funding Maldivian terrorist in Lahore bombing

A US citizen has been charged in the States with conspiracy to provide material support to a Maldivian terrorist who helped carry out a deadly attack in Pakistan in 2009.

48-year-old Reaz Qadir Khan, a waste water treatment plant operator for the city of Portland, US, was arrested on Tuesday (March 5) on a charge of providing advice and funds to Maldivian national Ali Jaleel.

On May 27, 2009, Jaleel – along with two other men – stormed Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) headquarters in Lahore and detonated a car bomb that left around 23 people dead and a further 300 injured.

Prior to the attack, US media reported that in 2006 Khan had received an email from Jaleel “goading” him about his past devotion to seek martyrdom for Allah.

“Where are the words you said with tears in your eyes that ‘we shall strive until Allah’s word is superior or until we perish’???” the email stated, according to US publication The Oregonian.

Following the message, Khan had then allegedly communicated and provided financial backing through email to Jaleel and his family, making it possible for the Maldivian to attend a training camp in Pakistan ahead of the 2009 bomb attack.

The emails cited in the indictment against Khan – sent in October and November 2008 – were said to have included a coded note from Jaleel telling Khan that he needed US$2,500 to pay for admission into a terrorist training camp.

The Oregonian reported that Khan had replied to Jaleel instructing him to pick up the training camp money from one of his associates.

Jaleel, who later responded saying he only needed US$1000 of the US$2,450 that had been sent, was then advised by Khan to send the remaining money to his two wives in the Maldives, The Oregonian reported.

The indictment does not cite that there had been any other emails between November 2009 and the May 27, 2009 ISI attack.

However, US media reported that less than a week after the bombing, US$750 was wired from Khan to one of Jaleel’s wives from an Oregon store.

Khan, who has pleaded not guilty during a court appearance on Tuesday, could face life imprisonment if he is convicted at trial, US media reported.

According to The Oregonian, Khan must now remain in his Portland home until his trial on the terrorism-related charge begins.

Local media reported that Jaleel, who lived at H.Moscowge in Male, featured in a video on the internet showcasing his terrorist training and subsequent attack.

A member of Jaleel’s family told local newspaper Haveeru back in November 2009 that he had left “around a year ago” and that there had been “no further communication with him”.

Jaleel had been caught once before whilst on jihad and was sent back to Maldives. On 26 December 2006, he was also sentenced to two years’ house arrest for giving religious sermons and preaching without a licence, local media reported.

“Martyrdom was certain”

In a video released by Al Qaeda’s media outlet, 30-year-old Jaleel, referred to as Mus’ab Sayyid, can be seen speaking in front of the camera surrounded by an assortment of weaponry.

Jaleel calls for his teachers and those he knew who had taken the status of scholars to visit the Mujahideen and make “decisions” based on what they saw.

“I want my blood to be the bit of the carpet which the Mujahideen have painted from their blood. The red carpet which would take the Umar to its glory,” Jaleel says in the video.

The footage shows Jaleel going through various stages of training, including throwing what appears to be a hand grenade and firing various weapons. The video then cuts to footage of the attack.

A white van carrying armed men pulls up to what appears to be a police check point, before two men disembark and open fire on various individuals manning the post.

The van continues through the checkpoint before briefly stopping beside two men who had hidden behind a barricade, at which point the armed men appear to shoot them from inside the vehicle.

The video then shows the same white van pulling up to a large gate, before detonating the explosives.

The Pakistani government said at the time that the car bomb attack was carried out in apparent revenge for an army offensive against Taliban militants in that nation’s north-western Swat region.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

JSC member Sheikh Rahman criticises JSC decisions on Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court in parliament committee

Parliament’s Independent Commission’s Oversight Committee on Thursday separately questioned two members of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) about the legality of the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court and the appointment of the panel of magistrates to the case against Nasheed, for his detention of Criminal Court Chief Judge Abdulla Mohamed.

Of the nine members currently serving in the judicial watchdog, Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman – the member appointed from among the public – attended the first committee session on Thursday.

Arbitrary appointment of magistrates

In response to questions posed by committee members, Sheikh Rahman stated that the JSC had arbitrarily appointed three magistrates from courts across the Maldives to Nasheed’s case, after dismissing the three names first submitted to the commission by the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court.

“Moosa Naseem (from the Hulhumale’ Court) initially submitted names of three magistrates, including himself. This means that he had taken responsibility for overseeing this case. Now once a judge assumes responsibility for a case, the JSC does not have the power to remove him from the case,” Sheikh Rahman explained. “However, the JSC did remove him from the case, and appointed three other magistrates of their choice.”

Sheikh Rahman stated that the commission had referred to Articles 48 to 51 of the Judge’s Act as justification.

“But then I note here that the JSC breached Article 48 itself. They did not gather any information as per this article. They stated that it is due to the large number of paperwork that needs to be researched that they are appointing a panel. However, this is not reason enough to appoint a bench,” he said.

“Later, when Mazeed assumed responsibility for the Hulhumale’ Court, I remember seeing a letter he sent saying that the Hulhumale’ Court had a huge number of cases and that they needed additional magistrates to oversee the cases. However, this was after the panel was already appointed,” Sheikh Rahman stated.

“The surprising thing here is that this court has been functioning with two magistrates serving there. There have never been workload complaints. It was only after the appointment of the panel, and Mazeed going there, that this problem has arisen. This itself is a questionable matter,” Sheikh Rahman alleged.

Responding to a question posed by Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) MP Ali Waheed, Sheikh Rahman spoke of the “questionable moves” within JSC which led to the removal of Moosa Naseem from the case.

“Two members of the JSC, if I remember correctly it was Abdulla Didi and Saleem, asked for Naseem to be removed from the panel, stating as a justification that he was ‘disturbing’ the panel. Somebody even submitted a letter to the commission saying so. The majority of the committee however dismissed this as it was believed to be not enough of a reason,” Sheikh Rahman said.

“If a Head Magistrate goes on leave, or is unable to attend work, then the JSC can appoint someone in his stead. This used to be my responsibility. Then suddenly, this responsibility was taken away from me and handed over to Saleem and Abdulla Didi. The next thing I heard was that they had replaced Naseem with Mazeed,” Sheikh Rahman alleged.

“This is in direct breach of the law. They cannot appoint someone else to the post unless it becomes vacant.”

Hearing this response, Ali Waheed then alleged conflict of interest inside the commission.

“I think it is all becoming very clear now. The MDP’s competitor, Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM) prospective presidential candidate Abdulla Yameen’s close friend, and Deputy Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Nazim’s former lawyer Ahmed Saleem is on the JSC as [President] Waheed’s appointee. They are working from inside the JSC to eliminate the candidacy of Mohamed Nasheed,” MP Waheed alleged.

Vice Chair of the parliamentary committee MDP MP Ahmed Sameer stated that according to the Judicature Act, only the Supreme Court and the High Court preside over cases with panels of judges as a norm.

He explained that it is only under rare and special circumstances that magistrate courts are allowed to form panels, and that even in such cases it is the Head Magistrate of the particular court that is mandated to make a decision on the matter.

Sameer then proceeded to ask Sheikh Rahman if, in light of these laws, he believed it was legitimate for the JSC to exclude Kaafu Atoll Huraa Head Magistrate Moosa Naseem, who was in charge of the Hulhumale’ Court, from the bench for Nasheed’s trial. He further inquired if the member believed it was a politically motivated move on the side of the JSC.

“In case a court requests more magistrates, the JSC can appoint additional judges to a court. However, I am not aware that the commission is under any circumstances allowed to assign judges to particular cases,” Sheikh Rahman responded.

“As for politicisation, I wasn’t at the meeting where this particular decision was made, so it is difficult to comment on the motivation behind it. However, I did notice from the recording that once one member proposed this idea, there was immediate approval and no amount of discussion was further carried out.”

JSC role in running “illegitimate court”

Referring to the provisions in the Judicature Act, Sameer further asked Sheikh Rahman if he believed that the JSC had acted in breach of the constitution and laws to maintain the Hulhumale’ Magistrate Court, which must be automatically liquidated following the ratification of the said act.

“At the time, I too was lacking the necessary information and voted in favour of running the Hulhumale’ Court. The documents provided by the JSC did say that there was a magistrate court in Hulhumale’ even in 2007. On later review, this too turned out to be untrue,” Sheikh Rahman stated. “I cannot say what their objective was, but there certainly was a lot of misinformation.”

“It is the JSC who decided to run the Hulhumale’ Court despite the Judicature Act. The decision was made with four votes, including that of Ahmed Rasheed. This member’s wife serves as a magistrate in the Hulhumale’ Court. This matter was then submitted to a lower court for review. However, Adam Mohamed redirected the case to the Supreme Court. He then cast the deciding vote in the Supreme Court. Do you believe this proceeded in a fair and just manner?” Sameer asked of Sheikh Rahman.

“Adam Mohamed should not have been there. I have raised the matter even in the JSC. I have also spoken with the Chief Justice about this,” the member responded.

“He said there is nothing he can do about this, and said that it had been a decision of the Supreme Court bench. I insisted that regardless of who had made the decision, there is no way a wrong can be considered otherwise,” he continued.

“The Chief Justice then said that Adam Mohamed may perhaps recuse himself from the case. However, Adam did not do so either.”

JSC Chair Adam Mohamed has responded to the committee’s summons through an official letter, refusing to be answerable to the committee as the matter in hand referred to an “ongoing case”.

However, JSC Vice Chair Abdulla Didi and Speaker Shahid spoke against the Chair’s decision, stating the commission must be answerable to its oversight body at all times, adding that Adam Mohamed had made a unilateral decision without consulting the majority members of JSC.

Shahid left on a trip abroad despite having agreed to attend Thursday’s parliamentary committee meeting.

At the committee meeting, Sheikh Rahman also stated that he did not find Adam Mohamed’s justification acceptable.

“It is the JSC which has the powers to look into complaints about this bench in question. It is also the JSC that holds the powers to dismantle the bench should need be. Hence it makes no sense to say we cannot discuss the matter at any point in time,” he stated.

Sheikh Rahman also criticised Adam Mohamed’s decisionto not attend the committee summons without consulting other members of the commission.

He further said that he did not believe the serving members of the JSC were able fulfil their duties as per the pledges they had taken, alleging that the commission had become subject to political influences.

Sheikh Rahman made similar remarks in a live television appearance last week. He is the second JSC member to blow the whistle. The first, Aishath Velezinee, challenged the JSC’s “unconstitutional” reappointment of poorly educated and ethically dubious judges in August 2010. She was subsequently stabbed three times in the back in broad daylight on Chandeenee Magu, Male’s main tourist strip.

The JSC is currently comprised of Chair Supreme Court Judge Adam Mohamed, Vice Chair Criminal Court Judge Abdulla Mohamed, Speaker of Parliament Abdulla Shahid, High Court Judge Abdulla Hameed, MP and government aligned Jumhooree Party (JP) Leader, MP and Presidential Candidate Gasim Ibrahim, lawyer Ahmed Rasheed, Attorney General Azima Shakoor, Presidential Appointee Mohamed Saleem and Member appointed from the public Sheikh Shuaib Abdul Rahman.

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)

Past and current presidents call for national rethink on gender rights

Former and current presidents of the Maldives have highlighted the importance of gender equality to national development on the occasion of International World Women’s Day on March 8.

President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik, as well as former Presidents Mohamed Nasheed and Maumoon Abdul Gayoom, have all spoken during the last two days on the importance of addressing gender related issues in the Maldives in areas such as domestic abuse and education.

The comments have been made as local independent institutions and civil society groups have alleged that the country has seen a regression in the rights of women and minors in recent years.

Local NGO Voice of Women, which claims to work as an umbrella group supporting other female-focused organisations in the Maldives, said that despite increased participation of women in political activities, there had been a perceived regression in the rights of females and children during the last year.

“The institutions in place to protect them have instead targeted them directly or let them down passively due to inaction,” read a statement by the NGO.

“Experience shows that countries cannot build a true democracy without the full and unhindered participation of fifty percent of our population; today we take the opportunity to recognize the courage and valiantness of the Maldivian women who are fighting against all odds and often times against the most harsh discrimination without taking a single step back, pressing for political reform and to establish a fair democracy in the country.”

The NGO’s statement was particularly critical of the treatment of women under the administration of President Dr Mohamed Waheed Hassan Manik, which in recent months has pledged to review laws that it claims have previously victimised women and minors who are victims of sexual abuse.

“The government is unable to destroy the unwavering spirit and determination of the Maldivian women who are confronted with batons, kicked with boots, handcuffed, stomped with shields, pepper sprayed directly into the eyes, and water cannoned while peacefully protesting on the streets or jailed without charges, sexually abused and humiliated while in custody; these heroic women continue to fight for their rights, rights of their children, rights of their children’s children,” the Voice for Women statement claimed.

“They continue to fight for the freedom of their country, for justice, for peace and for democracy.”

Back in April last year, parliament passed the Domestic Violence Bill with broad cross party support as part of efforts to provide a legal framework to protect victims from domestic abuse through protective orders and improved monitoring mechanisms.

In a statement released yesterday addressing the rights of females, President Waheed delivered his best wishes to all women in the Maldives.

“The International Women’s Day is being marked to reflect on the status of women, assess their empowerment, advocate for greater opportunities for women to progress, and seek the support for all for those ends,” read a President’s Office statement.

“It is a high priority of the Maldivian government to support efforts in attaining gender equality in the society. The President highlighted women’s increasing contribution to national development. The increase in women’s contributions to and participation in the development of the country showed the change in the outlook of the people on gender related issues.”

Former presidents speak

Speaking Thursday (March 7) ahead of International Women’s Day, former President Maumoon Abdul Gayoom said that under Islam, men and women were considered equal. He therefore requested an end to the practice of gender discrimination, particularly in obtaining education.

Local newspaper Haveeru quoted Gayoom, who is currently the president of the government-aligned Progressive Party of Maldives (PPM), as saying that some Maldivian females continued to be denied the opportunity to undertake higher education by their families.

He claimed that “misguided religious beliefs” were often behind such gender discrimination.

Meanwhile, former President Mohamed Nasheed was quoted in local media yesterday as calling for a change in how Maldivian men perceived women in general.

According to the Sun Online news agency, Nasheed told Maldivian Democratic Party (MDP) supporters gathered at the Dharubaaruge convention centre in Male’ that greater efforts needed to be made in empowering women “in all areas”.

“Not just because of efforts made by a gender ministry, but through transport ministry as well as health ministry as well as education ministry. We need to incorporate women into our main policies,” he was reported to have said.

Nasheed also called for new methods of protecting women against abuse during his address.

“Conservative” attitudes

Despite the calls of some of the nation’s most senior political figures, a recent national study found support for women’s equality was found to have experienced a “significant drop” despite overall progress in improving the human rights situation nationally.

The conclusions were made in the Human Rights Commission of the Maldives (HRCM’s) second baseline survey on behaviours and attitudes regarding human rights in the Maldives, which was published December 10, 2012.

Male attitudes have become “more conservative” regarding women’s rights issues, whereas female views have become more supportive of rights in some areas, was one of the conclusions raised in the The ‘Rights’ Side of Life” [report].

Likes(0)Dislikes(0)